Advanced search

Weaning at 20 weeks, can't really decide????

(21 Posts)
nali23 Sat 19-Oct-13 03:35:32

My daughter is almost 20 weeks n she is showing all signs of weaning, my mother & sister have suggested baby rice, & many other mums in my circle have also said that it's alright to go for it at this age with mash, purees and baby rice as it would help me later with solids & finger foods.

My Hv is also old fashioned & she also said that i can if i feel like as these food won't really do any harm as long as they r fresh & home-made.

But i'm really confused to whether go for it or wait till 6 mnths. hmm

FadBook Sat 19-Oct-13 04:43:49

The guidelines are around 6 months for a reason. That reason is research based evidence - not just someone deciding an age.

Babies don't have the right type of enzymes to break down starchy foods and the gut isn't mature until around 6 months.

However, as you know, all babies will be different so age wise may differ from one child to the next.

This is a good read -

FadBook Sat 19-Oct-13 04:45:07

I would also read this on reasons NOT to give baby rice.

What is the rush? If baby is hungry, feed her more milk.

rootypig Sat 19-Oct-13 05:12:19

Wait til 26 weeks, per the WHO guidelines. A lot of the 'signs' of readiness aren't that at all. A naturally curious baby is interested in everything you do. At 20 weeks my DD tried to grab my wine, didn't mean I thought she should have it!

If you do think your baby really wants and needs food, like Fad I would say defo not baby rice! A little mashed banana or pureed apple or carrot would be much nicer. If you try it and DD is not interested, wait a few weeks. Weaning is so much easier when the baby wants to.

And I never hear of anything but duff health visitors on here! hmm Who the fuck trains them. Or doesn't.

Brugmansia Sat 19-Oct-13 12:08:50

What signs is your dd showing that make you think she is ready? Also why do your friends and family think feeding mush now will help with solids and finger foods?

As I understand it the only genuine signs they are ready is being able to sit with minimum support, being able to get food into their own mouth and having lost the tongue reflex that pushes anything that goes into their mouth out.

We started at about 23 weeks doing blw. DS was sitting really well and everything he grabbed went into his mouth. We gave steamed brocolli and carrot. I didn't know if he'd lost the tongue reflex but figured if he wasn't quite ready he would just spit everything out anyway. I understand though with spoonfeeding purees and rice you can get the baby to eat and swallow even though the tongue reflex is still there trying to push it out.

DS is now 8 months and ready adept at feeding himself all kinds of solid food (even with no teeth yet). Nct friends who started early with purees are have only been introducing actual solid foods in the last couple of weeks.

jammiedonut Tue 22-Oct-13 16:46:48

Fwiw my mum is a health visitor and is advising me to wait at least six months. Puréed and mashed foods will not prepare baby to receive finger foods, I'm not sure where your hv/family/friends got that idea? If dc is hungry, just up their feeds. IMO its really not worth doing it early, especially when the guidelines advise you not to. You may have a lot of people tell you they did and their children are unscathed, but as someone weaned early and suffering with a multitude of digestive problems (may be coincidental of course) I'll be waiting. A baby doesn't need food at 5 months, milk is sufficient and will give all the nutrients they need so there's no rush.

noblegiraffe Tue 22-Oct-13 16:51:43

The NHS says the signs you need to look for are that they can sit up, grab a banana, get it to their mouth and eat some.

Baby rice is minging. If you wait till six months you can at least give a range of nice food.

worldgonecrazy Tue 22-Oct-13 16:51:47

No rush, but you may want to look at Baby Led Weaning (BLW). That way baby decides when they are ready for weaning. It takes all the guess work out of it.

nali23 Tue 22-Oct-13 20:17:29

thanx guys..... it really helped me deciding wat to do..... its just that im 1st tym mom n every1 around me is quite experienced..... i too wanted to wait n have decided to give my dd follow on milk along side breastfeed..... grin

ExBrightonBell Tue 22-Oct-13 21:10:53

Follow on milk is not meant for babies under 6 months (26 weeks). If you're going to give something apart from bm it should be first milk. First milk is ok till 12 months in fact.

TeamSouthfields Tue 22-Oct-13 21:19:11

Follow on milk is not great for a 20 week old

pumpkinsweetie Tue 22-Oct-13 21:21:46

All babies are different, go with what you feel is right and if the hv has agreed there is no reason why not to go ahead.

heidihole Tue 22-Oct-13 21:24:35

Not follow on milk, just get normal formula.

rootypig Wed 23-Oct-13 06:11:00

OP there is no advantage to formula over breastmilk in terms of 'filling the baby up'.... though of course if you don't want to do more feeds then mixed feeding is a good solution. And yes, please use first milk.

keelo123 Wed 23-Oct-13 06:30:14

Follow on milk is for a baby/toddler who get most nutrients from solid meals- not the best thing to give until then. I was always led to believe that the earlier solids were introduced the higher the risks of developing allergies or digestive problems later on. Looking back at how my 3 have ended up it's the other way around but I still think it's best to follow medical advice because they could of ended up being a lot worse if I hadn't. Good luck xxx

MigGril Wed 23-Oct-13 06:48:46

just feed more, as other have said don't use follow on. first infant formula is the only one recorded by the nhs for babies under 12 months. follow on formula is a marketing ploy and contains higher levels of iron which would probably make a breastfed baby constipated.

RudolphLovesoftplay Wed 23-Oct-13 07:01:50

I'm a HV. Wait till 6months, as all the signs she is showing are likely normal developmental stages. At 6months, your DD tummy will be ready to break down the food using enzymes that aren't mature currently. Also, her liver won't be functioning fully so will struggle to metabolise anything other than milk.
If she's hungry, give her more milk.
For what it's worth, I was trained by the NHS. I have a degree in applied public health and and the professional nursing qualifications (just to prove I am trained!!) also, I think I'm nice to mums and not at all judgy, if you want to feed your baby at 20weeks, I wouldn't mind if you were my client-it's your baby. But would prefer you had all the facts before making an informed choice.

nali23 Wed 30-Oct-13 21:26:32

oh sorry i meant aptamil milk for hungry babygrin
n i got really gud changes to see in my dd's sleep.....
finally getting some sleep at nytsmile

LoganMummy Wed 30-Oct-13 21:42:17

We started DS on baby porridge (very watery) at 20 weeks. He was feeding constantly and up every two hours at night. We only started weaning on advice of HV.
Every baby is different but for us it helped.

lharris1985 Thu 31-Oct-13 14:50:03

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

FadBook Thu 31-Oct-13 15:30:03

The problem I have with your link lharris1985 is that as much as it advocates weaning when the parent thinks the baby is ready; the website fails to point out the following:

1) not all of the signs of readiness are listed. See the NHS guidelines here

2) some signs they are advocating as 'readiness' signs are incorrect. They quote: If your baby is over 4 months and has good neck control, is able to sit upright when supported and makes chewing motions, your baby may be ready – talk to your health visitor - making chewing motions is the most ridiculous thing I've heard as a sign of readiness. My DD made chewing motions on her dummy at 6 weeks old. She wasn't ready for solids.

3) no evidence is referenced, it is all the author's opinion and other parent comments which are highlighted. This is a good summary article of the evidence out there over the last 20 years, however it is 3 years out of date, so The Cochrane studies also support waiting until baby is 6 months old, with clearly listed benefits of doing so.

4) the website is littered in adverts for Heinz purree baby food, which markets baby food at 4 months; and as such would not advocate the NHS recommendations or the WHO recommendations, when revenue is being generated by a baby food maker.

Finally, Analytical Armadillo points out some interesting myths in this blog.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now